NOTE: All timestamps are in the future because WE are in the future. The care takers of Midnight Ridazz.com reserves the right to remove, edit, move or delete anything for any reason. None of the opinions expressed on these boards represent the Midnight Ridazz nor can anyone purport to speak on behalf of Midnight Ridazz.
and I'm sad to say, I was VERY disappointed about Obama supporting faith based initiatives. fuck....
also... about the Wesley Clark alleged "dis" on McCain that is being played up by the mainstream media? I'm sorry but fuck you, getting shot down in a plane or being a POW does NOT automatically make you presidential material. why is the media hyping the shit out of this (including NPR) ?? Clark is not even part of Obama's campaign the guy supported Hilary!
I hop Ron Paul runs and spoils McCain. But Obama lost major points with me.
I'm with you on this one RB.
Ron Paul is definitely the man for the job.
He worked his way through college and med-school, he served in the Air Force, and his insistency on "solid currency" gets him my vote.
He is not even President yet, and he is already disappointing his disciples
I bag to differ, I don't think distributing money to people that help others in the community is that bad of a idea. I actually like the plan, when I heard it today.
It might be a cop out, but when you have private entity doing things that the gov't should provide, there is lot less red tape involved to get what that organization is setting out to do done. You have an organization, sometimes paid, sometimes volunteer, ready to get the task done, without having to follow guidelines that may slow them down. These organizations may be on the ground, and know how to tackle the problem right away.
It is actually only a half a billion dollars which he purposed. That is peanuts in the federal budget. To private charities and aid organization, that bit of money can be stretched out far, wide and used efficiently. I also think he purposed strong over site, which you know that Bush didn't do. He just gave out the money, used it for publicity and didn't follow up if the money was spent properly. I do think an Obama administration will have more integrity about over site.
Soon we will hear: Patrick state why Obama is still the man, Sam's keyboard full of something to say, USER1's bringing atheism into this, and host of various people stating that the system is broken and the parties are one party working for the paymaster.
BRING IT ON..................................................................................
If Ron Paul runs as a independent, (which he stated he won't)
he won't spoil anything. Paul got very little votes in the primary.
People weren't smart enough to vote for in the primaries, they are going to wise up enough to vote for him in the general election.
It is a blasphemy to democracy when someone states that a person is a spoiler to an election. That is saying that somebody doesn't have a right to run for an office if they can't get the money together, or enough votes to actually win. That like stating, you shouldn't speak, if people aren't going to agree with what you say. People should vote for who they feel is best, regardless if they will likely win or not.
lets get it clear. I'm not supporting Ron Paul for prez. but I have to say the guy has sound words on foreign policy and balls to say it...
"I bag to differ, I don't think distributing money to people that help others in the community is that bad of a idea. I actually like the plan, when I heard it today."
I can't support taxpayer money going to some hokey pokey religious brainwashing. religion teaches seperatism and teaches people that entire swaths of people are "good" and "evil" when in reality there is no good or evil there is self interest and enlightened self interest.
i would love to see president ron paul. the man has the right idea. (that idea being: "Government necessarily fucks things up, even when its heart is in the right place, so lets give the government as little power/responsibility as possible.")
i've always had a soft spot for obama, just because the guy is so ridiculously likable. however, as soon as he clinched the nomination i had to harden up that spot a little. i just can't bring myself to trust a mainstream politician.
I had a very interesting conversation last week with my wife's cousin who had just returned from a visit to Iran. It was definitely enlightening, as my shallow understanding of that country was as a monolithic theocracy controlled and populated by insane islamists.
The points in the conversation that I found most interesting was that Iran is a very complex and incongruous society... where in a day you would hear about so and so being arrested and not heard from again and then read newspapers with editorials so scathing against the government that nothing in the west compares.
The universities have a 70/30 split with women making up the majority of the students... unheard of in muslim countries. This is because entrance is based on a blind numbering system, highest scores receiving choice universities. Once, however, in the educational system women are required to wear full burka.
Western tourists are a rare sight... something like China in the 70's. However in Tehran, people would proudly point out how International the city is... that they have 3 Turkish restaurants (in a city of over 12 million!).
Though nothing like the numbers there used to be, Iran still has a population of 24,000 jews who live, fairly unmolested. They even have a jewish hospital in Tehran and Jews donated an emergency medical center during the earthquake crisis of '06... though no signage was allowed that designating that it is a jewish organization.
What I found most interesting was how the government deals with claims of people who left (or were forced to leave) during the revolution. They won't, of course, admit that anyone was "forced" to leave in 1979. People's property was not simply absorbed automatically by the state. It was taken in a very traditional and bureaucratic method. When taxes were not paid notices were placed in the newspaper and it was eventually liened and sold. Something that happens here in the US all the time. However, in Iran the government is willing to give you a residence of equal value at no cost with legitimate claims... not something that would ever happen here.
I left the conversation with a healthier view of the complexities of the situation in Iran. The leadership is sick and dangerous today, but that could change in a democratic method. I know many, many, many persians and they are generally bright, reasonable people... but of course they are the one's who were chased out of Iran. And my girlfriend (aka wife), though holds an iranian passport, can't go to iran because her family name is blacklisted because of their close connection to the Shah.
Can Ron Paul accept 84 million in campaign financing even though obama and mccain are not? Can only the DNC and RNC accept that money from taxpayers? If so, I think thats kinda fucked up because legally, I dont think that only two parties should be allowed to reap the benefits of taxpayer money.
That is, if paul was to run as an independent. And i think he should, cause if he could rally I's from the middle of the electorate by getting his message out with that money, he could make some noise. Run as the green party or some shit or bring back to OG Whig party.
Paul offers common sense and currently will gmv unless something changes before Nov.
Barack hasnt backed anything up yet, but offers direction and a message of hope that ppl can gravitate towards.
McCain is a screwed puppet as he has to many ppl controlling his strings.
The only thing Ron Paul has going for him is his foreign policy. If he were elected president the environment would be destroyed quicker than it has been during the Bush administration, we would have no 40 hour work or overtime or minimum wage laws, we would have no laws preventing discrimination, the guy is a hardcore rightwing no government politician and we would start losing a century of social gains if he had his way.
the US media is not a source for reliable information. In fact I believe the EXACT opposite of everything the US media tells me about foreign policy and about 20% of everything domestic. They neglect to talk about a LOT of shit including the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953-54. Kudos to Iran for booting the puppets. If some foreign country came in here and overthrew Bush (even though I hate the guy) I would fight to get rid of the foreign interlopers, I think we all would.
you should look up some things about Iraq while you're at it. That country had the highest literacy rate of any Arab nation (pre invasion) according to the CIA world fact book in 2002. Women's rights were greatly expanded under the secular regime of Saddam Hussein.
Saddam did not actually gas hundreds of thousands of his own people if you believe the UN accounts of the Iran Iraq border conflict. In fact he was not nearly the tyrant that the media claims.
besides it just doesnt compute: In a country of 20 million it's hard to believe that 300,000 compatriots, relatives and business interests could have been gassed without an absolute uprising like the one we see now against the most powerful military on earth. somehow these same people didnt have the resources to rise up against Saddam but they somehow can make things impossible for the worlds most powerful military? I'm not buying it.
"
"I see Iran as acting logically and defensively." - Ron Paul
This guy is out of touch with reality."
the guy is SPOT on. those British soldiers were in disputed territorial waters. Iran was defending it's sovereignty. Even Rosie O'Donnel saw it that way - days before she got the boot off the view.
Maritime sovereignty is not the issue. That was a minor episode that every country with a coast guard gets involved in. Where Iran is not acting logically or defensively is its waging of cold war with regional powers... iraq, israel, lebanon, while building up offensive weaponry. Their "logic" tells them (as stated yesterday by the foreign minister) that neither the US nor Israel are in a political position to attack. Hence, they are acting in their own self interest without regard for possible international consequences. Much as Iraq did, before it found out that they were WRONG in their logic.
I'm not making any statement about what should occur or occurred in the past. I'm just saying that Iran is NOT acting defensively, they are acting selfishly and politically as they see an opportunity for a regional power grab. And, they are not think logically believing that they are safe in their actions because of the lack of international will.
Two big mistakes, and one's Mr. Paul doesn't realize either.
As for "Kudos to Iran for booting the puppets" I think you need to do some more studying on that subject. It's very complex.
Iran is not waging the war. Iran is not the provoker. This conflict is decades old all the way back to when the country was drawn up with straight lines crossing through ethnic regions that took thousands of years to form. Imagine a foreign government dividing france and italy into two halves and forcing the two halve to become new countries. there would be all kinds of conflict. small wonder same has happened in the middle east.. Iran are the ones being attacked and provoked. If they don't act in defense of themselves the political leadership would crumble. Iran is being pushed around politically by the US and Israel. If Iran's leadership doesnt stand up to it they would get replaced by those that will.
tell me some more about the CIA coup? I am open to learnign everything I can. The most comprehensive account I've heard so far came from th BBC in 2004. they did a 50 year anniversary 2 part series on it. but hey the BBC is part of the western media...
by the way, I believe the US media is lieing straight up that Iran's government directly supports Hezbollah (an organization formed specifically to resist the Israeli attacks and occupations of southern Lebanon that began in the 70's and continues to this day) Iran's shiite population supports Hezbollah in the same way that the US's catholic Irish population supports the IRA. The government looked the other way because it would have been politically impossible to do otherwise. even if Iran does support hezbollah as a matter of state policy why is it hard to accept that People of same ethnicity and religious backgrounds support those of same across the globe let alone in the same chaotic region with common foreign enemies. When christians are being attacked somewhere, wouldnt it be logical that christians in the US will send support and lobby their government to make things easy to send help?
"Iran is not waging the war."
i said cold war. supporting hezbullah, a proxy army to attack israel and lebanon.
"Iran is not the provoker."
yes it is.
"This conflict is decades old all the way back to when the country was drawn up with straight lines crossing through ethnic regions that took thousands of years to form."
what conflict are you talking about? the only conflict that had/has anything to do with post ww1 division was the Iraq/Kuwait war and israel/palestine. There's no border conflict now regarding Iran.
"Imagine a foreign government dividing france and italy into two halves and forcing the two halve to become new countries. there would be all kinds of conflict."
yes, hence the initial rationale for WW2. but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
"Iran are the ones being attacked and provoked. If they don't act in defense of themselves the political leadership would crumble."
no one gives a shit about Iran, except when they act to destabilize a region and threaten allies. they are acting like outlaws right now... think of them like the midnight ridazz or the middle east.
"Iran is being pushed around politically by the US and Israel. If Iran's leadership doesnt stand up to it they would get replaced by those that will."
pushed around politically beats pushed around militarily.
RB, believing or not believing does not make something so, or not so. There is far more evidence pointing toward Iran supporting hezbellah than not. And the difference is Hezbellah is a terrorist army out to KILL PEOPLE.
"Iran is being pushed around politically by the US and Israel. If Iran's leadership doesnt stand up to it they would get replaced by those that will."
"pushed around politically beats pushed around militarily. "
having undercover special US forces in your country isn't being pushed around militarily. Having your two neighboring countries, being occupied by the a military force of a country that is constantly saying you are in the wrong and we may have to bomb you isn't pushed around militarily. Having the next possible president of that country sing a parody song label Bomb Iran.
"Iran is not waging the war." i said cold war. supporting hezbullah, a proxy army to attack israel and lebanon.
All country's with some finacial and military power does this. Saudi's suppported Iraq against Iran for fear of Shiate takeover of Iraq, that wouldn't have been good for the rulers of Saudi Arabia. USSR gave aid and soliders to CUBA as a threat to the US and for Cuban protection. This only make military sense, to keep your enemy occupied, and fighting somewhere else. Read the Grand Chess Board by Zbigniew Brzezinski. Mata Al' Sadr army is being financed and kept from fighting in Iraq by Iran as a possible threat to US force if they decide to go into Iran. A silent bomb waiting to explode, if you will
The mullahs (oligarchs) that rule Iran have an interest in keeping the status quo to maintain their vast wealth in Iran, of course they are going to do what they can to maintain it. That may mean financing fights else where.
"besides it just doesnt compute: In a country of 20 million it's hard to believe that 300,000 compatriots, relatives and business interests could have been gassed without an absolute uprising like the one we see now against the most powerful military on earth. somehow these same people didnt have the resources to rise up against Saddam but they somehow can make things impossible for the worlds most powerful military?"
These type of things happen all the time, in history, and all over the world at present. Sadam had the country locked down. The majority of the population stayed in line, because they where safe prospers, feed, happy, and knew that was something you couldn't get away. Just like we don't do certain things here. The people that where gassed where tribal secs that where causing problems for Sadam in another parts of the country. If there where not really allowed to talk about in the media, how would the rest of the country know.
Right now in the past few years in the US, thousands of people of been rounded up and deported. Some are being held without charge and some are being tortured. Who is up in arms about?
BigbikeDan is the only person in this community who goes out in a orange jump suit and trys to bring attention to this situation.
"The people that where gassed where tribal secs that where causing problems for Sadam in another parts of the country. If there where not really allowed to talk about in the media, how would the rest of the country know."
why would they care? It isn't their tribe, they don't know those people, they are Kurds, and as Shiite or a Sunni, the Kurds would like to see you dead.
Do you really care about all the people locked up for pot in this country? If so what have you done about it?
Who have you called about it? Have you ever bothered any legislators about it?
What are you doing about the slaughter that are country performs in Iraq right now? In Afghanistan? Have you even talk to your congress ional representative about funding these artosicty? Who is your congress person? Do you even know them, do you have a relationship with them?
"having undercover special US forces in your country isn't being pushed around militarily."
oh, really? and on what blog did you read that was happening? I thought it was Iran that was sending in their military into Iraq... but that was reported on multiple western news sources so I doubt it is true.
"Having your two neighboring countries, being occupied by the a military force of a country that is constantly saying you are in the wrong and we may have to bomb you isn't pushed around militarily."
you're right. the logical thing for Iran would be to WANT Hussain back in power... you know, the guy they had a murderous fight with for 10 years. Why would they welcome an invasion by a country who kills your mortal enemy FOR YOU? good thinking.
"Having the next possible president of that country sing a parody song label Bomb Iran."
you're right again. any country that puts a fatwa out on a cartoonist for drawing a picture obviously has no sense of humor. god forbid that anybody says something negative in a humorous way.
"All country's with some finacial and military power does this. Saudi's suppported Iraq against Iran for fear of Shiate takeover of Iraq, that wouldn't have been good for the rulers of Saudi Arabia. USSR gave aid and soliders to CUBA as a threat to the US and for Cuban protection. This only make military sense, to keep your enemy occupied, and fighting somewhere else."
you're right again. every country does what it does. and every other country responds how it responds. all's fair. they support hezbullah, we sing parody songs.
"oh, really? and on what blog did you read that was happening? I thought it was Iran that was sending in their military into Iraq... but that was reported on multiple western news sources so I doubt it is true."
See Bofro's second posting on this thread. It was published in the New Yorker. Written by a long time well respected mainstream journalist, that has contacts with people in the White House and the Pentagon. Why does it matter if it is in Blog.? Some of the most real/honest reporting in Iraq is done by Blogers in Iraq. I'm not Roadblock, I don't disbelieve something because of its source. I take what is said in account and try to analyze it is fact or fiction, or take it in account and compare other things that are written.
"you're right. the logical thing for Iran would be to WANT Hussain back in power... you know, the guy they had a murderous fight with for 10 years. Why would they welcome an invasion by a country who kills your mortal enemy FOR YOU? good thinking."
Iran did try to contact and negotiate with the US to help stabilize Iraq when the US did invade Iraq. It fell on deaf ears. The United States ignored them.
"you're right again. any country that puts a fatwa out on a cartoonist for drawing a picture obviously has no sense of humor. god forbid that anybody says something negative in a humorous way.
Don't forget the weekly (or is it monthly) anti- US march and rally that happens in Tehran. Killing people isn't humorous. I expect a higher level of thinking from my country, its people, and it's elected legislators. I don't think there is anything humorous about a bomb dropping on anybody. IT'S DEADLY
"you're right again. any country that puts a fatwa out on a cartoonist for drawing a picture obviously has no sense of humor. god forbid that anybody says something negative in a humorous way. "
see it's statements like this that make it impossible to argue about this.... by your own words Iran is a complex society. there are religious leaders and political leaders and business leaders and populists.... you cant possible say that IRAN "the country" put a fatwa on someone. the reality is that a religious leader who may or may not hold rank in the government put a fatwa out... big whoop. but the media will play it up insanely. just like over here maniacs like Pat Robertson - who does hold political sway - saying that Sharon's illness was god's punishment for capitulating to the Palestinians (what a joke Sharon was responsible for vast civillian massacres committed against palestinians)
all I can say is read all sources. including foreign sources and CHOMSKY and then triangulate for the truth. we're basically all arguing using a formula of facts and lies spread by the media to begin with....
in other words we ourselves have religious right leaders who issue all kinds of ridiculous statements. that katrina happened because of a forth coming gay pride event etc etc etc
SEXY 300,000 people dieing in the US. that info WOULD NEVER EVER be able to be supressed and we have the bestest most capable FBI and CIA NSA clamp down organizations on earth. there's no way that info would have been held back under the much weaker Saddam regime. the info doesnt match reality.
sexy, you're basing your statement on a one sentence description of an upcoming, unpublished article...
"He writes about Congress' funding of covert military operations in the upcoming issue of The New Yorker."
As for my reliance on blogs for hard information, that is a very iffy source as there is NO confirmation of who it is writing it, what their qualifications are, and what their political or financial motivation is. They have very little libel liability, unlike a corporation, so can weave fact and fiction freely. It is the internet afterall and I'm not really the 16 year old high school girl that I say I am.
Case in point: I'm the one who originally wrote about this on my news blog: "Iran did try to contact and negotiate with the US to help stabilize Iraq when the US did invade Iraq. It fell on deaf ears. The United States ignored them." And I now admit that it was a total lie.
"As for my reliance on blogs for hard information, that is a very iffy source as there is NO confirmation of who it is writing it, what their qualifications are, and what their political or financial motivation is."
uhhhhh and there is for the maintream media? LOL.
after 5 years they still can't agree on a number of Iraqi civilians killed. and thats the point. each side exaggerates to their own purposes with the winner eventually setting the defacto statistic.
I was very suspicious when they quickly executed Saddam having never prosecuted him for his alleged hundreds of thousands of kurds being gassed... why didnt they initially just bring that case up? seems like a slam dunk and an oppotunity to tell all the other Iraqis about siad massacre who were so easily masked from it by Saddam's information repressing machine....
RB, I totally agree with reading all the (reliable) sources and triangulate the truth. However, the truth is never a fixed position, rather a dead reckoning (to use a nautical metaphor).
But, the difference between Robertson and the Ayatollah is one is a fringe powerless clown, the other is the Supreme Ruler of Iran. And he is... the government ANSWERS to the Ayatollah and his fatwa is a religious DICTATE.
Salman Rushdie might be able to explain the difference between the two men better than I.
you have to be kidding me. Pat Robertson has INSANE political sway. If he doesnt then I will eat my hat. Evangelical christians are a political menace to our society. I know because I actually watch TBN from time to time. they are constantly putting out propaganda on the middle east. they got the voters out in force last election. religious groups are an intense force in our political system. the fucking president has to go to church!
sexy, just kidding about it being a lie. i don't know, never heard that report before. but at face value it strikes me as an overly simplistic summation of a very complex situation at a very complex moment in history.
RB, I am no fan of mainstream news. Surely nothing (0/0) on TV. If i'm not reading or seeing primary data (first hand) it goes into my very big "maybe" basket in my head. But blogs, unless their writing about the street battle happening outside their window at that moment and have video to prove it, I just assume it's some kid writing on his sticky keyboard from the basement of his mom's house.
the kids are on myspace blogging about the new sidekick LX (mine is dope!)
the political blog are definitely to be taken with a huge giant bolder of salt. BUT if you cross reference everything you hear with "how would I act if it were me in their shoes" then you start reaching a general consensus of what the truth may sort of look like.
blogs are opinions of people with inflated egos. mini o'reillys, basically. and RB, major error in your thinking that there is ANY similarity between the religious right bafoons here in the US and The Supreme Leader of Iran... that is not my term, that is what their governmental title and powers actually are. big fucking difference.
uhhh, it's 3:17 and i think i need to get dressed and go to work. ooops.
Regarding blogs;: My three favorites are Ubrey02 against the machine, Soapbox LA, and that guy with the badge Will Cambells opinion piece in the LA TImes. You are saying these three beloved men in our community are "opinions of people with inflated egos. mini o'reillys, basically." I bag to differ. I know them all personally, and they write what they write for the betterment of our City. Writing isn't easy, it is time consuming. I write on here to try to change peoples mind with info that I think will better us all. I think most people are good, and most blogger do what they do, for the betterment of the world.
The religious right does have some sway. They may influence some voters, just like if you are a Democrat or Reb. all those circular and flyer's that you get in your mail box from various political organizations, telling you to vote this way or that way. I think most people just trash those as junk mail.
I heard a interview of this lady who wrote a book about, how actually ineffective and how little power the religious right has. one thing that stuck in my mind was how she said , (i think it was a Robertson organization) had a million people on their e-mail list. The organization sent out a email to all its members to sign a on-line petition against this abortion law. They only got 30,000 people to sign the petition. What is that Dr. Thompson? 3%
"and RB, major error in your thinking that there is ANY similarity between the religious right bafoons here in the US and The Supreme Leader of Iran... that is not my term, that is what their governmental title and powers actually are. big fucking difference. "
Indigis I love ya man but I think you are making a mistake by not recognizing just how powerful religious interests are in this country. that includes Christian, Evangelical, Catholic and Jewish religious interests.... essentially all bickering (but united in status quo) factions of the Judeo Christian enterprise - all of it immune from taxes..... Religion has a POWERFUL sway over people and government. in the US it's a back room thing, over there they have it out in the open. over here it's covert operations.
http://home.comcast.net/~theyellowdog/joerepublican.htm
A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
A story floating around the internet...
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.
He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.
Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.
He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.
He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.
The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
ohh, and i'm not saying the religious right doesn' hold politcal and social sway here in the US... though I think it's shrinking from what it was. I agree with you there.
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
the US media is not a source for reliable information. In fact I believe the EXACT opposite of everything the US media tells me about foreign policy and about 20% of everything domestic. They neglect to talk about a LOT of shit including the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953-54. Kudos to Iran for booting the puppets. If some foreign country came in here and overthrew Bush (even though I hate the guy) I would fight to get rid of the foreign interlopers, I think we all would.
